word Father then to the verb found And thus read Abraham our father concerning the flesh but methinks the trajection is too harsh and besides the conclusion shall want one principall term that best serves to express the things in hand and therefore I rather refer it to the verb and thus read Abraham found not by the flesh or as pertaining to the flesh According to the flesh That is saith Ambrose S. Ambrosius ad loc by his Circumcision fittingly to what we may suppose the Apostle to preoccupate and yet in as much as ye count Circumcision is a work he affirms it as well of morall works as of circumcision Say others as Cajetan by flesh that is Cajetan ad loc by righteousness which stands in works and are done by the flesh that is by the body Others as Theodoret by his own strength Theodoret ad loc Illyric in clavi Zanch. de tribus Elohim lib. 3. cap. 1. and good vvorks done thereby Generally I thus conceive it that Abraham obtained not righteousness by any work Ceremonicall Morall or whatsoever can be imagined to assail to righteousness except faith in Christ so finde I the use of the word in the same case Phil. 3.3 4 5 6 9. Where under this name of flesh comes circumcision our own righteousness which is by the Law or whatsoever is or may be opposed to that righteousness which is by the faith of Christ The whole explination amounts to this summe Abraham obtained not righteousness by any his own works See we the confirmation The argument is taken from an inconvenience issuing out of that supposition If Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to glory But he hath not any thing whereof to glory at least with God Ergo he was not justified by works Let us see what our adversaries have to say against this full argument of the Apostle For ground of their answer they attempt an inversion of the Apostles syllogisme and thus conceive him to reason Sasbout ad loc If Abraham were justified by works then had he no glory or boasting with God he might indeed by that means procure the commendation of a man excellently righteous but with men only not with God but Abraham had cause of glorying and boasting with God Ergo was not justified by works This cross frame of the argument Augustin in prefat ad Psal 31. Ambros ad loc I could not without indignation read were it not that it hath great Authors to give it countenance for Reverence to them let us afford it tryall First then consider that the Apostle in this argument hath apparent respect to that ground laid down Rom. 3.27 That is that we are to be justified by such a mean as whereby boasting may be excluded according to which ground he here concludes That Abraham was not justified by works for if that were true then had he cause of boasting Is it not now too grosse blindness so to conceive the Apostle as if he would give Abraham cause of boasting Secondly besides this the proposition thus conceived is apparently false For if Abraham were justfied by works then sure he had cause of boasting even before God for what greater cause of glorying even before God then this That he hath wrought works to his justification and may therefore say he is not beholden to God for his greatest blessing justification as having purchased it by his own works of obedience see Rom. 3.27 Thirdly add hereunto that the assumption is apparently false for Abraham if the Apostle could judg had no cause of boasting with God his justification being as ours meerly of grace through faith in Christ Jesus leave we therefore that dream and see whether their other answers have more waight Say some Catholiques we must here understand observation of Legall Ceremonies as Circumcision Sabbaths New-Moons c. Not works of the Law Morall Answ To this idle exception see my Annotation in Rom. 3. But bring we this distinction into the Apostles argument and see whether boasting be excluded If Abraham were justified by works ceremoniall then had he cause of boasting belike not so if by works morall and how I wonder do works Ceremoniall give greater cause of boasting then works Morall is their dignity now greater then works of Morall obedience Fidem vestram Papistae Behold to obey is better then sacrifice and to hearken then the fat of rams 1 Sam. 15.22 I will have mercy and not sacrifice Hos 6.6 Mat. 9.13 sexcenta hujusmodi Bellarm. de Iustific lib. 1. cap. 19. blush at such idle evasions which your own Bellarmine willingly disclayms and confutes by Fathers Besides this according to this answer boasting is only in some part taken from Abraham namely in respect of his observance of Ceremonialls for Morall obedience is still left him for matter of boasting but boasting on any pretence is excluded in Pauls intention Ergo. Hear Hierome Ex operibus legis Hierom ad Ctesiphont Adv. Pelag. ultramed non justificabitur om nis Caro quod nè de Lege Moysis tantùm dictum putes non de omnibus mandatis quae uno legis nomine continentur idem Apostolus scribit dicens consentio Legi Dei c. iterum scimus quòd Lex spiritualis est c. We know saith Paul that the Law is spirituall Rom. 7.14 What Law I wonder if not that Morall Let us see yet whether other playsters will salve the sore Bellarm. qua supra works of Abraham are of two sorts some Praecedentia fidem going before faith some Facta per fidem done by faith the Apostle understands works done before faith and regeneration not those done in and by faith Let us bring this into the argument If Abraham were justified by works done without faith by the meer power of natural free will then had he cause of boasting not so if by works done in faith Answ And why not I marvail when works done by grace according to their opinion are done partly by strength-naturall of free-will so much then as free-will helped in the doing so much cause of boasting Abraham had of himself But Abraham had no cause of boasting c. 2. What if it be apparent that the Apostle speaks even of works done by Abraham now believing and regenerate then methinks these works must also be included in the Apostles intention Certainly if we consider the testimony alledged out of Gen. 15. in the next verse to prove that Abraham was not justified by works it will easily appear that Abraham was long before this regenerate and believing and had many works of faith whereas yet the testimony of righteousness is given him not for working but for believing It was a work of faith that Abraham did in following the Lords call out of his countrey Heb. 11.8 Other works of piety and love see Gen. 12.8 13.8 9. 14 16 20 c. Yet not these works done in faith but faith
inasmuch as no man can ever be assured that he hath fatisfied the Law nor indeed can by works fulfill it But the other Expositions seem more pertinent let us view them Faith is vain That is say some frustrate and fruitless though how they explain not perhaps they thus conceive it If they onely which fulfill the Law be heirs then faith is fruitless and can never attain the inheritance promised inasmuch as no man is able to fulfill the Law But I take it the Apostle hath eye rather to the prescription of faith on Gods part then to the fruit on ours So that the sense is this If they which seek the inheritance by the Law do by the Law obtain it needlesly and vainly was faith prescribed to be the means of inheritance To discern the consequence of this argument view we whereupon the necessity of substituting faith instead of works grew The Lord had made a covenant of life with man upon condition of fulfilling the Law so that if he kept the Law and continued in obedience thereof he should live see Rom. 10.5 Lev. 18.5 Man falling through disobedience lost the benefit of that Covenant and withall propagated to posterity a nature so not onely impotent to fulfill the Law but vitiously inclined to the breach thereof that there was no hope of salvation by the Law Howbeit the Lord out of his love to mankind and loath that the whole posterity should perish in his rich mercy was pleased to enter a new covenant of life and salvation establishing another means for our happiness which was faith of the Messiah by which through grace performed we might from Christ receive a better and more firm title to the inheritance This was one reason why faith was prescribed as is intimated Rom. 8. and Gal. 3. Now how needless had this been if by the Law we might inherit salvation To what end go we by faith out of our selves to seek righteousness and salvation in Christ if by the Law performed by our selves we might have obtained it The Consequence therefore we see to be firm Let us now consider what out of this argument may be collected viz. Observ The Doctrine of salvation by works frustrates faith and chargeth on God the crime of folly in ordeining it to be the onely mean of inheritance Much to this purpose speaks the Apostle Gal. 3 c. If righteousness be by the Law then Christ died in vain it had been needless for the Lord to send his Son to die for our sins thereby to procure unto us justification if by the Law we might have obtained the blessing and Rom. 8.3 he makes this his reason why the Lord sent his Son in the similitude of sinfull flesh because it was impossible for the Law weakned by the flesh to give us righteousness Whereto what say our adversaries Forsooth their old distinctions they obtrude for answer Works are of two sorts some done by strength of naturall free-will some by grace and faith works of naturall free-will indeed frustrate faith and grace and Christs death not so works done by grace in faith yea the Apostles consequence Gal. 3. is very firm if by them we will exclude works done through grace For it followes not that if we be justified by works following faith that then Christ dyed in vain Bellarm. de justif lib. 1. cap. 19. nay if Christ had not dyed we could not have been justified by faith or works issuing therefrom It being Gods grace in Christ that hath made our works so virtuous Answ Where first we desire to know for our learning where in all the Scripture we may finde that Christs death or our faith gives to our works justifying or saving virtue That our services are acceptable to God by Iesus Christ that our works done in faith are pleasing to him though in great weakness performed we finde that they are of value to countervail our sins or to purchase Heaven we finde not nay the contrary we finde in sundry Scriptures taught us 2. Yea the purgation of our sins we know Christ made by himself Heb. 1.3 and the way into the holy of holies to be opened by his flesh never by our righteousness Heb. 10.19 20. 3. Let the Reader observe how cleanly a gull they would put upon us in this distinction of works done by grace and those done by power of naturall free will For in these works of grace free-will is according to their principles the predominant 4. Doth the Law of God in any place allow us justification by works imperfect though done in grace search and see whether it damne not to hell the least blemises cleaving to our works and require not only that the principall manner and end be regular but that in every respect they be pure and free from blemish All which considered return us our conclusion firm and undoubtfull notwithstanding these cavills of popish Iustitiaries In our passage let us take notice of the intolerable pride of our merit-mongers chusing rather to robbe God of the glory of his wisdome then in humility to acknowledg the imperfection of their own obedience How much better were it with holy Iob 4â— 6 to abhor our selves in dust and ashes then thus to nullifie the wisdome of God in frustrating his prescripts hath God appointed faith the sole mean of inheritance and shall we by works seek to inherit the blessing I say not much but sure Gal. 4.30 if Ishmael may not be heir with the Son of promise no more shall Workres with believers The second inconvenience follows to be scanned The promise by this means becomes ineffectuall How if any demand Answ Because the inheritance promised shall never by this means be obtained For hangs it on condition of fulfilling the law And must those that desire to inherit by legall obedience obtain salvation Who then can be saved Seeing no man is able by any measure of grace in this life given to fill up the measure of legall righteousness This saving the judgment of more Learned I take to be the ground of the consequence the rather for the reasons objoyned Hence the inference is fluent That who so teacheth us to seek salvation by works frustrates Gods promise and deprives us of salvation Not but that good works are necessary but as duties not as merits for thankfulness not for righteousness as the way to the kingdome not as causes of salvation the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman Gal. 4.30 That is by Pauls intention not legall workers with Evangelicall believers Gal. 3.9 As many as are of the works of the law are under the curse so far is it that they should have any title to the blessing Such mischiefs bring pharisaicall Iustitiaries upon their sectaries Hear the Reasons They bind us by this means to a condition and means of Salvation impossible not onely to Nature but to Grace according to that portion God is pleased in this life to
obedience except thou mayest thereby be justified Is not that love of God in sending his Son to dye for thy sins that he might make thee zealous of good works enforcement sufficient to all obedience except thou mayest part stakes with Christ in the glory of thy salvation Hear Paul The love of Christ constraineth me to all faithfulness in my calling 2 Cor. 5.14 2. And is it nothing that by this means we make our calling and Election sure 2 Pet. 1.10 3. Nothing that others by seeing their spotless conversation are occasioned to glorifie God Mat. 5.16 In a word that nothing might be wanting to quicken our dulness the Lord hath been pleased by promise to binde himself to recompence even of slenderest duties tendred to him in sincerity Mat. 10.41 A reward thou shalt have accrewing not from worth of thy works but from grace of the promiser Will not that satisfie Not at all except they may merit Heaven as if they should say they had rather have no salvation then be beholden to Gods bounty for the bestowing The Apostle methinks thunders against such meritmongers They are fallen from grace and Christ shall profit them nothing Gal. 5.4 Lastly Hence learn to detest as greatest enemies to thy salvation all such as teach to seek it by the law of such saith Paul let them be Anathema Aut utinam exscindantur Gal. 5.12 Of all Hereticall and false Teachers this last age hath afforded I know none more pernicious then these two 1. Libertines that teach to neglect obedience as in every respect unnecessary 2. Justitiaries that press obedience as available to justification The first sort are odious to all except Epicures The latter by how much the more strictly they urge obedience and that so fittingly to the humor of nature by so much the more pernicious As much excludes from Heaven the intention of meritting by performing as the neglect of the Lawgivers authority in omitting obedience These are enemies to the Dominion The other professed adversaries to the grace of God VERS 16 17. Therefore it is of faith that it might be by grace to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed not to that only which is of the Law but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham who is the father of us all Vers 17. As it is written I have made thee a Father of many nations c. HItherto hath been shewen that justification is not by works Followes now farther confirmation of the affirmitive part that it is by faith The arguments here laid down are from the ends and scope which the Lord propounds to himself in our justification and salvation First The glory of his grace Secondly Our comfort Thirdly And both these are intended to all the seed All these severall arguments are artifically linked together by the Apostle and as it were entwyned one in another by mutuall dependance Let us view them severally It must be by faith that it may be by grace If the inheritance be ours by grace and not by debt then must it be by faith but it is ours by grace Ergo. The force of the consequence we will shew after we have a little explaned the text The verb suppositum are both wanting It is by faith What must be by faith Either the promise or the inheritance the inheritance rather see vers 13.14 What is the verb to be supplyed whether it is promised or it is attained whether we will the sense no whit varied by either The parcells here to be considered are two First That the inheritance is attained by grace Secondly That except it be attained by faith it cannot be ours by grace It were impertinent perhaps on this occasion to run out into that question Whether by grace we are here to understand the gifts of grace in us or the favour of God towards us The best Interpreters amongst the adversaries oppose it to debitum and expound it liberality Cajetan Sasbout By grace then understand we Gods free and undeserved favour without any of our works or debt accrewing from God to us by merit see vers 4 and Rom. 11.6 Observ The point is that our righteousness and salvation is of Gods free favour Hereto after a sort agree our adversaries but yet latet anguis Whether meerly of grace or mixtly of grace and merit Who so is conversant in their writings shall finde them so sharing the matter betwixt grace and merit that he would think the spirit of Pelagius to be revived in them He seeing how odious his barefaced heresie was teaching that a man without help of Gods grace might live without sin began to colour it with equivocating and in terms to joyn with orthodox teachers and to give place to the necessity of grace assisting in the fulfilling of the Law whereupon said Austin finding but the term of grace and mercy by cunning concession inserted by Pelagius Augustine de natur grat cap. 11. Laetitiâ repente perfusus sum quòd Dei gratiam non negaret per quam solam homo justificari potest But what was this grace of God admitted by Pelagians Nothing else but freewill which our nature receives from God without any precedent merits and the law or doctrine of God Augustin de Haeres Haer. 88. whereby we are taught what we should do and in doing hope for With like cunning deal our adversaries Justification and salvation they are of grace But what is grace the gift of charity in us How of grace because not without it but prinbipally and originally from it Let us enquire whether this can be the sense of the Apostle in ascribing the inheritance unto Gods grace or whether his purpose be only to make grace a sharer with our merits and not rather so to give all to grace that he excludes all debitum that may accrew to us in respect of our works See Annotat. ad cap. 3.24 Freely by grace that is meerly by grace and vers 27. So that all boasting in our selves may be excluded In a word See 1. Our state before calling it is such as wherein no merits except for the truth of the point merita mala as Austin terms them Augustin de grat lib Arbitr cap. 5. can have place whence is that of Paul so often repeated not of works of righteousness Tit. 3.5.2 Tim. 1.9 2. After calling works imperfect Rom. 7.3 The good that is in them meerly the work of Gods grace whence that of Austin Si donasunt bona merita tua non deus coronat merita tua tanquam merita tua sed tanquam dona sua Augustin de grat lib. Arbitr cap. 78. And again Si vita bona nostra nihil aliud est quam dei gratia Sine dubio vita aeterna quae bonae vitae redditur Dei gratia est ipsa enim gratis datur quia gratis data est illi cui datur The labour would be long and endless almost to
was imputed to righteousness True saith Bellarmine Abraham was now regenerate and had done many good works of faith and yet the Apostle when he saith he was justified by faith and not by works rejects not his works done in faith from power of justifing but those only which he might have done not of faith For even they who have faith work sometimes not of faith as when they sin or do works meerly Morall without relation to God In a word the Apostle speaketh conditionally and according to their opinion which ascribed righteousness to their own strength Answ Now what is to be willfully blind if this be not was it ever heard of that a man should be justified by works not which he had done but which he might have done or think we the Saints of God to whom he wrought or the Iews that perhaps disturbed them were ever so shameless as to ascribe justice to works finfull or meerly Morall such as heathens performed It s apparent that the Apostle fits answer to Iewish objections who urged works of law written for matter of justification yea in likelihood works done in grace for whereto else comes in the example of Abraham so worthy a Saint of God Certes if of works meerly naturall there had been question example of Abimelech or Socrates or Aristides had been as pertinent to the purpose Lastly say others the Apostle speaks not de justificatione Pii but Impii not of that justification whereby a man of a righteous man is made more righteous but he speaks of justifiing a wicked man which is done by faith Answ Concerning this distinction see Annotat. in Chap. 3. But it is their opinion that he speaks of the first justification only surely Sasbout confesseth that the testimony out of Genesis treats only De augmento Iustitiae non de justificatione Impii And that is apparent to every confiderate Reader This mist of cavills thus dispelled let us now resume the Apostles conclusion and lay it for a ground that Abraham was not justified by any works of any law in any state by him performed Use Hear this now yee justitiaries that dare obtrude your menstruous merits to Godsjustice and for them claim righteousness at his judgment seat Behold Abraham that mirrout of good works as well as of faith yet stript of all right and claim to righteousness by any his obedience and dare any of his children challenge more at God hands then Abraham the pattern of justification Bring to the ballance your voluntary poverty building of temples pilgrimage vvorks of mercy or if there be any vvork that you think more glorious and see if they be not found lighter then vanity it self to those of Abraham that one vvork of obedience in offering his Son Isaac upon the altar vvhich of the sons of men can parallel I spare amplifications because they are extant in the Apostle and particularized in Ambrose De Abrah Patriarch lib. 1. Cap. 8. VER 3 4 5. For what saith the Scripture Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt but to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justfieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousness VVHether the words be conceived as proof of the Minor or of the principall conclusion it is not much materiall the issue being all one The argument proving it is taken from the manner or meanes of Abrahams justification which was meerly gracious the Scripture affirms that Abrahams believing was counted to him for righteousness Gen. 15.6 Ergo he had no cause of boasting because that not to the worker but to the believer only faith is imputed unto righteousness The consequence of this Enthymeme hath its proof from the place of unlikes That the force of the proofe may be better conceived let us view a little the terms of the comparison The persons compared are he that worketh and he that worketh not but believeth The things wherein they are compared as unlike is the manner or means whereby these severally obtain righteousness The worker that is he that hath works to be justified by he hath righteousness reckoned to him as wages not granted out of favour but paid as of debt He that hath no works but believes hath righteousness counted to him not of debt but of favour as if he had said that yee may see how Abrahams having faith counted righteousness left him no cause of boasting observe this difference betwixt the worker and believer viz. He that hath works to bring before God hath righteousness ascribed unto him of debt not of grace because that by his works he hath purchased righteousness as wages and so by consequence hath cause of boasting him that justifieth the ungodly it s otherwise this faith is of grace imputed to righteousness Abraham therefore being of this latter sort not a worker but a believer and by consequence hath faith of grace counted to him for righteousness surely had no cause of boasting for this matter of justification This having the better judgment of the learned I take to be the naturall resolution of the text Let us now turn back to the words and enquire their sense and what instructions they afford for our use In verse the third are two things 1. The Judg whom Paul appeales unto 2. The sentence of the judg For what saith the Scripture Holy Apostle thou forgottest thy self that didst appeal to Scripture to give sentence in a matter of dobut For we are taught by men of unerring spirits the Scripture is Mutus Index a dumbe judg not able to utter what may resolue us in matter of doubt Now how much better were it that these men were dumb then to use their tongues in manner so blaspheously derogatory to him that inspires the Scripture For be it that in property of speech the Scripture is speechless yet contains it not directions sufficient to determine doubts or needs it any more then mans minde to conceive and his tongue to publish what it contains Or hath the Church any other authority about the Scripture save only to declare what Gods Spirit therein speaks Must the sense needs be locked up in the Popes breast and the Scripture taught to mean only what he determines 2. Is it so strange and abhorrent from common language that the Scripture should be said to speak In common assemblies what more usuall How saith your record What saith the Law 3. How ever I hope Gods Spirit may be said in Scripto speak to his Church without any great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inasmuch as he doth therein utter what his meaning is And writing doth the office of speech thus far that it serves to express the conception of our minde As David said of his tongue it was the pen of a ready writer Psal 45.1 So may we say of the pens that the Lords holy scribes used they were the tongues of a ready speaker
unto them and taken notice of so far as that he was for it esteemed righteous We shall best understand the meaning by comparing the self-same phrase as it it is extant Psal 106.31 Phineas his executing judgment was counted to him for righteousness to all generations for evermore that is he for that fact or by means thereof had the esteem of a righteous man amongst men unto all posterity So Abrahams faith was counted to him for righteousness before God that is he for believing or by means of faith was esteemed or reckoned righteous before God This as far as I conceive is the proper meaning of the phrase If that hypallage seem harsh thus conceive it His believing was reckoned unto him to righteousness that is came into reckoning so far with God on his behalf or for his benefit that thereby he obtained righteousness Faith then is of that reckoning with God as that to Abraham yea to every man endued thrrewith he allowes the esteem of a righteous man understand faith as it s before described For the better understanding of this conclusion let us see a little how faith obtains this blessing of righteousness at Gods hands or what is the reason of the connexion of righteousness with believing Bellarm. de just if lib. 1. cap. 17. Divers are the explanations Papists impute it sometimes to the merit and worth of the very habit or act of faith as if it deserved at Gods hands justification and had the force of a proper efficient cause meritoriously to procure it Against it are these Reasons First Bernard Ser. 1. de Annunciat Hereof we may say as Bernard of other good works or as he terms them merits that it s not such as as that for it righteousness should be due to the believer of right or as though God should do us wrong except he gave to us believing righteousness for this as all other good qualities or actions is the gift of God and therefore man is rather a debtor to God for it then God to man Secondly Besides this how holds the difference assigned by the Apostle betwixt the worker and the believer in the manner of obtaining righteousness if righteousness belong to the believer as a reward of debt If righteousness belong to the believer of debt as a reward of believing then vainly doth the Apostle alledg this as a difference betwixt the believer and the worker that the one hath righteousness paid as of debt the other given as of grace but the difference is sure authenticall Ergo. Their arguments will be fitlyest answered when we come to set down the opinions of our own Divines Sometimes they thus conceive it that faith is the beginning of righteousness Bellarm. qua supra and the inchoate formall cause of righteousness that is part of that righteousness whereby we are made formally righteous and that they would prove out of this text because to him that believeth in him that justifyeth the ungodly his faith is counted to righteousness But they would deceive us with a false glosse for that is not the meaning that faith is counted our righteousness but that its taken notice of so far as that to the believer righteousness is imputed A mean therefore it is of obtaining righteousness not righteousness it self except by righteousness they will understand that of sanctification 1 Ioh. 3. Wherefore we acknowledg it to be a part but what is that to the righteousness of justification whereof the question is 2. After their own glosse its righteousness only aestimativè not therefore formally Sometimes again they make righteousness depend on faith as a preparation thereto in part necessary to dispose the subject to receive justification that is as they term it the infusion of charity and other graces whereby we are made formally righteous Versipelles Where may we finde you Is it the form of righteousness and yet but a preparation to righteousness Ob. The form inchoate not compleat Answ But I demand Is it before the other graces of God in time Or are they togethes with it infused If so how then make you yet a preparation only to righteousness when as together with it other gifts which make up righteousness compleate are infused Let us leave them and come to explications of our own Divines Some thus Righteousness or justification hath its connexion with faith by an order that God hath been pleased to set down in the Covenant of grace which is this that whosoever shall believe in Christ shall be justified and saved This condition now performed on our parts justification is ours and we are as righteous in Gods esteem as if we had all the righteousness of the Law performed by our selves Now this is an evident and clear truth that in the Evangelical Covenant faith is the condition of justification But first if faith justifies us as a condition performed by us fain I would know how we may maintain that doctrine of our Churches concerning sole faith and its being the only thing in us that avails to the attainment of justification for if we view the tenour of the Covenant of grace faith is not the only condition required of us to justification and remission of sins for repentance also is a condition required in that covenant to the same end Mar. 1.15 Repent and believe the Gospel Act. 2.38 Repent and be baptized for remission of sins but faith must so justifie that in that work no other thing may share with it no not repentance it self Ergo Besides this if the act of faith qua actus be that for which we are justified how doth the Apostle describe our righteousness to be without works vers 6. How sets he the worker and believer in direct opposition in the articles of justification Perhaps it will be said that works of the law only are excluded not this which is a worker of the Gospel Answ It should seem that not only works of the law but universally all works are excluded because whatsoever may occasion boasting in man is exclnded Rom. 3.27 Now as great occasion of boasting is left to man in the act of faith as in any work of the law whatsoever Nay may some mansay for faith is the gift of God and the exercise of faith meerly his work Answ The same may as truly be said of love patience c. These being also gifts infused of God and their actions even every act of them meerly his works in us even as meerly as the act of faith It remains then that we enquire whether in the other explanations of our Divines more likelihood may be found Usully it s thus conceived to justifie namely as it is an instrument to apprehend that righteousness for which we are justified even the * 1. Cor. 1.30 righteousness of Christ whether of this life or death or both it is not pertinent to this place to enquire but in this respect righteousness is ascribed unto it And here we are asked whether we
faith in Christ If a man have works his works are taken notice of and recorded and withall his reward is thus registred after the Covenant of the Law Righteousness of Debt If a man want works but have faith his faith is recorded and to him also is ascribed or imputed the same reward though out of another cause Righteousness by favour The thing we have in the word of God and perhaps it is Allegorically expressed by allusion to the customs of men This I am sure is truth in the Legal Covenant If a man do the Commandments he shall live in them and the doers of the Law shall be iustified This also is true in the Evangelicall Covenant He that believes shall be saved and if a man believes in Christ his faith shall be reckoned of to iustification The reward is all one that God intends to both they differ 1. In the condition 2. In the ground of payment Righteousness is ascribed to the Worker of Debt to the Believer of Grace God should do the worker wrong if he should not approve him as righteous that hath fulfilled the Laws But it s his mere grace that to a believer he will ascribe righteousness sith his righteousness is merely precaria performed by another and by him nothing brought but faith to receive it and tender it unto God and that faith also merely the work of God If I fail in expressing my self or explaining the Apostle yet let no man blame my desire of both but further my weakness with his help that the Apostle may be understood Sense The sense then is this as I conceive it To him that hath works such as the Law prescribes and brings them unto God righteousness is ascribed or set on his reckoning as wages belonging to him of debt and not of grace VERS 5. But to him that worketh not We must beware that we mistake not the Apoâ—â—e as if he promised righteousness to him that believes and neglected good works Jam. 2.26 For the Apostle James hath taught us that faith without works is dead and if a man say he hath faith and have no works can that faith save him And the Apostle describing faith justifying as it is in the justified man saith it worketh by love Gal. 5.6 What is then the sense To him that worketh not that is hath no such works to bring before God as for them to claim righteousness thereby or as Ambrose expounds Ambros ad loc Non operanti id est qui obnoxius est peccatis quia non operatur quod mandat Lex To him that hath no works because he is a transgressour of the Law But believeth in him See here say some how faith justifying is described To be rather an affiance in the Justifier then an assent to the Gospel Answ Rather see here affiance meeting with assent in the person of the believer they agree in the subject differ for all that in their nature In him that justifieth the ungodly Doth the Lord then justifie the wicked Answ Surely though he be God that forgiveth iniquity and sin yet will he in no case clear the wicked Exod. 34.7 and Prov. 17.15 He professeth that he is as abominable that justifieth the wicked as he that condemns the righteous Answ Hereto answers are diversely conceived according as the terms admit distinction First thus Wicked men are of two sorts some such as continue impenitently in their sinns some that by grace repent and believe in Christ Of the first sort its true God justifies them not that is acquits them not while they so continue and yet wicked men repenting and believing in Christ that is ceasing to be wicked God clears and holds innocent for to such he forgives iniquity transgression and sinne Paraeus ad loc Exod. 34.7 or thus Justifying of a wicked man is either against the orders of Justice without receiving sufficient satisfaction for the trespasse or else upon receit of sufficient satisfaction In the first sense God justifieth not the wicked in the second he mercifully justifieth us having received satisfaction in the death of his Son Lasâ—ly Justification hath divers significations sometimes it signifies to make just sometimes to declare just or to absolve In this last sense God justifies not the ungodly that is absolves him not whiles he so continues but yet he makes an ungodly man righteous Of the first kind of justification understand Moses of the second Paul His faith is counted for righteousness See explication ad vers 3. Observ The things out of this passage of Scripture observable are these First the direct opposition of Faith and Works in this Article of justification If it be by Faith it s not of Works If by Works not of Faith that howsoever it be true their concurrence is certain their agreement amiable in the life of the justified yet their contrariety irreconcileable in the procurement of justification Not to be long in the manifestation of it First the Apostles argument hath else no force in the case of Abraham except their opposition be such as is mentioned 2. Besides this view it in the contrary principles from which the two kinds of justification proceed The Worker is justified of debt the believer of grace that look what opposition there is betwixt favour and debt the same is betwixt justification by Works and justification by Faith Like see Rom. 11.6 Now were it not a point of acute Sophistry to teach us how to deny the Apostles argument and to tell him the consequence is not good because they are able to assigne a medium Witty I confesse but with such wit as S. James tells us to be * Jam. 3.15 devilish Such as it is let us hear it forsooth they point us to this medium of participation It is partly by Faith partly by Works I say not any man is so impudent as in plain terms to contradict the Apostle but surely this in the issue shall be found their answer howsoever with distinctions they colour the matter Let us hear them Justification by Faith and justification by Works indeed are opposite if ye understand in both the same justification but there is a first justification and a second the one is by Faith the other by Works Again works are of two sorts works of Nature works of Grace betwixt justification by works of Nature and that by Faith there is indeed an opposition not so in that by works of Grace For these distinctions and the vanity of them see suprà ad ver 2. Annotat. ad cap. 3. This once is evident out of this place that the Apostle imputes the justification of Abraham now regenerate unto his Faith and betwixt the justification that Abraham had being now in grace and that of works placeth the opposition Besides this what means the Apostle to befool the Galatians for expecting the perfection of this benefit by the Law which was begun by the Gospel Gal. 3.3 Would he not thereby teach us
that whole justification is perfected in Faith And for works of grace though as hath been said they agree with faith well in the heart of a Christian yet justification even by these works is opposite to that of Faith Phil. 3.9 More I adde not onely I advise them that labour to mingle Moses and Christ Faith and Works in this point of justification to remember what Paul hath pronounced Gal. 5.4 with a solemn protestation That as many as look for justification by works whether in whole or in part are fallen from grace and Christ shall nothing profit them This opposition also is to be remembred against all such as teach us to expect justification by faith as it is a work the opposition is none that I can conceive betwixt the justification by the work of faith and the work of love The next thing here offered to our notice is a distinction of rewards and it lies thus There is a reward paid as Debt there is another given of Favour And it is of some use in that grand question betwixt us and our Adversaries touching the merit of good works which from no ground they ofter infer then from this Because they shall be rewarded To this the answer is Not every work that hath a reward is by and by meritorious except the reward be paid as debt to the work Now the reward that is given to our obedience is given of favour not paid of debt and that we prove thus First because the same that is called the reward of obedience is said withall to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a free gift of God A reward and yet a free gift How if paid of Debt not given of grace besides saith Bernard Mans merits or good works are of no such quality or worth as that eternall life should be due to us for them of right or as if the Lord should do us wrong except he gave it us Nam ut taceam Bern. Serm. 1. ce Annunc quòd merita omnia Dei dona sunt ità homo magìs propter ipsa Deo debitor est quà m Deus homini quid sunt merita omnia ad tantam gloriam as S. Bernard His reasons are these Man is debtor to God for his good works because they are his gifts not God to man 2. The reward exceeds by many degrees the worth of the work Therefore is not a reward of debt but of favour If they shall reply and say God should wrong us except he thus rewarded us I answer Not us but himself the debt not growing from the worth of our works but from the grace and truth of the Promiser Debitor factus est Deus non aliquid a nobis accipiendo sed quòd ei placuit promittendo S. August De verb. Apost Serm. 16. To him that worketh not but believeth The sense see supra So then God hath not left sinfull man Observ without a means of justification though he want works such as the law required to righteousness for what through want of works we fail of he hath provided by faith shall be obtained even righteousness such as may stead us at the barr of Gods justice A point worthy of our attentive consideration for the magnifying of Gods mercy and furtherance of our comfort It was grace enough in God that he was pleased to create us in so excellent a condition only through desire to communicate himself unto us and for it he might justly claim obedience to any his commandements especially proportioned to our abilities even without any promise of farther recompence but loe that nothing should be wanting to our encouragement when he propounds a law to be obeyed he also covenants with him to crown his obedience with immortality This do and thou shalt live Lev. 18.15 Rom. 10.5 But see mans great unthankfulness to God and unmercifulness to himself not contented with the happiness presently enjoyed nor with the hope of immortality promised he affects not to be like God as he was but to be equall unto him in knowledg Gen. 3.5 He throws off the yoak of obedience and thereby deprives himself justly of all the happiness he had or could hope for plunges himself into misery endless easeless and remediless except God in mercy provide an escape Now behold the unsearchable riches of the mercy and love of God toward man loath that he should perish he enters another course for his recovery sends his own Son out of his bosome in the similitude of sinfull flesh by obedience unto death to satisfie justice that there might yet be a way for his mercy to overflow in the salvation of his chosen and in him enters a new league with man for restoring righteousness and salvation under a condition so reasonable as none more could be devised believe only in him that justifieth the ungodly thy sins are pardoned righteousness restored salvation recovered Lord what is man saith David considering a blessing far inferior that thou so reckonest on him or the son of man that thou so visitest him Psal 8.4 Our hearts must needs be dull and dead if these things work not in us more then acknowledgment even admiration of Gods endless mercy Well this was Gods mercy towards us Vse 1 Now sure I doubt not but those that have felt in any degree the misery to which the Law hath sentenced them and withall how impossible it is for the law to restore them inasmuch as its weak through the flesh can willingly say Amen to that thinksgiving of the Apostle Thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift 2 Cor. 9.15 That our hearts may be yet more inflamed to this duty consider we I beseech you the preferment and property God hath given man in this mercy even above Angels creatures by naturall condition more excellent then he Heb. 2.16 Angels sinned God sent them no Mediator they fell by not obeying God hath made them no promise of rising by believing Man sinned God sent his Son to propitiate man fell by disobedience hath promise of restoring by believing Let them perish everlastingly with hellish Angells that acknowledg not this mercy or that renouncing the righteousness of faith seek to establish their own in works of the Law Vse 2 Now as this serves for the magnifying of Gods mercy so no less for the multiplying of our comfort and nourishing our hope of righteousness yea though we have no works such as the law prescribes to justification for behold another mean of righteousness provided for sinners even faith in him that justifies the ungodly And therefore what do we vexing and breaking our hearts for sins once committed now repented A mustard seed of faith commands a mountain of sin to the bottome of the sea What if Moses be so strict that none but exact justice will serve to justification One greater then Moses is here that tels us faith is available to righteousness And to the end the conscience of sins after faith received might not overthrow hope of
l. 4. Homo non quaerit salutem â Sacramentis quasi ab eis sed per ea à Deo Haec enim praepositio A * Scotus ad lib 4. dist 1. denotat Causam agentem per verò notat causam instrumentalem Well let us yeild them to be organa whether Morall or Physicall It pleaseth not Bellarmine Bellarm de effect Sacram. lib. 2. cap. 11. that they should be causes Morall though he confesse a stream of their own Writers run current that way But they must be Physicall instruments that is such as properly and by inherent vertue work or cause justification And if any ask what that vertue is that God hath put in them to effect this grace He answers It is nothing but Gods moving or using of them to that purpose For by this that God useth the Sacramentall action to produce grace he doth elevate it above the nature and makes it reach to an effect supernaturall Now I might be long in shewing the contrary judgement of his own side some making them means or instruments of grace per modum continentiae because they contain the grace they signifie some by concomitance onely c. I will propound the sentence of Scotus onely whom ye shall find thus to resolve There is not saith he in Sacraments aliqua Causalitas activa propriè dicta respectu gratiae but they are said to be causes of grace improperly inasmuch as the receiving thereof is an immediate disposition to grace mox For thus hath God disposed and set down the order and hereof he hath certified the Church that to him that in due manner receives the Sacrament he will give the effect thereby signified This I trow is far from Bellarmines conceit But let us further examine his conclusion In all ordinary Physical instruments which God useth to effect his purposes by there is besides Gods use of them a vertue and power and fitness given them to produce what he useth them unto as meat to nourish clothes to warm Sun to cherish the earth c. and shall Sacraments be ordinary Physical instruments and yet lack this inherent vertue What Philosophy yea or Divinitie so teacheth Besides this Sacraments all suppose those habits wherein they make justifying grace to consist Acts 8. Matth. 28. to be in him that receives them they must have faith or at least 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before Sacraments may be applied unto them and shall we think they are elevated by this use and motion they speak of to work what is already wrought Lastly if they wrought thus Physically as it were potions methinks then every one to whom they are applyed must needs receive their effect unavoidably and so Simon Magus must receive the grace of the Sacrament as well as Simon Peter which if it be absurd as absurd it is to make them Physicall instruments or Active causes of this grace which they call justifying To conclude this whole question May it not be granted that Sacraments are instruments or means of grace Answ No doubt yes but instruments morall onely that is such as whose vertue sticks not in them but onely because where they are duely used God is present by covenant to work grace supernaturall So Scotus ut suprá so some of our Divines Yet more nearly 1. Consider what grace they are ordained to work as means 2. How they concur to the working of it The grace they work is 1. Confirmation in perswasion of justification 2. Care and increase of sanctification c. How work they it Answ Occasionally onely quatenus they represent Gods actions Christs person and benefits our duty c. by which representations Gods spirit worketh in our hearts in these or the like discourses God hath in the Gospel promised remission of sins to all those that believe in Christ and for further assurance hath been pleased to ordain Sacraments as it were his seals set to his covenant wherein I see represented the death of Christ that procured pardon of sinns and in the Ministers action delivering the Sacrament to me Gods act in delivering Christ and his benefits to me is resembled Now his promise is that if I bring faith to the use of the Sacraments the things they signifie are mine How then assumes conscience I believe what God in the Gospel promiseth what in Sacraments he seals unto me and thence follows as a conclusion my faith confirmed c. Now what say our Adversaries to this manner of Sacraments efficacy Forsooth if in this manner onely they have their efficacy there shall then be no difference betwixt Sacraments of the Old Law and those of the New Testament Answ What none at all Bellarm. de effect Sacram. lib. 2. c. 8. They confesse elsewhere that we agree with them in the differences thus far 1. The signes are others 2. The number less 3. The facility more 4. Clearness of signification greater 5. Manner of signifying different 6. Endurance of new longer Object Yea but in the point of efficacy there is left no difference For thus theirs were effectuall by stirring up faith by their significations and by the devotion of the receiver which they call The work of the Worker Observ Is that the matter then hear what I think the Apostle here teacheth or at least warrants us to teach by collection That Sacraments of the Old Testament were the same with ours in matter signified in use ends and efficacie What is Baptisme unto us more then a signe of our initiation into the Covenant Gen. 17.7 Rom. 4.11 Deut. 30.6 A feal of the righteousness of faith An occasionall mean of sanctification The same was Circumcision to Abraham and to all his posterity in the ordinary measure of efficacy there might be some odds in efficacy and manner of it none at all that can be assigned For 1. In their Sacraments they had Communion with Christ They ate the same spirituall meat 1. Cor. 10.3 4. drank the same spirituall drink that we do though under other signes or elements Object Rhenenses ad loc Bellarm. de effect Sacram. lib. 2. c. 17. August de utilit Poenit. cap. 1.2 Nay rather say Papists the same amongst themselves not the same with us Answ Then let us hear Augustine Eundem inquit cibum spiritualem manducaverunt quid est eundem nisi quia eum quem etiam nos mox Eundem non invenio quomodo intelligam nisi eum quem manducamus nos Inst What Paul there speaks of were not Sacraments Answ How then fit they Pauls intention which is apparently this to take from this people vain confidence in Sacraments 2. What means Paul to say of their passage through the sea c. it was a baptizing of them Cyprian Epist 76. August in Psal 77. Hear ancients Cyprian Mare illud Sacramentum Baptismi fuisse declarat beatus Apostolus Paulus dicens Nolo vos ignorare fratres c. 1. Cor. 10. Augustine Per mare transitus
point at all the dreams and devices of the enemies of Gods grace with their cunning shifts in that no less then Sacrilegious diverting the more part of the glory of mans salvation from Gods grace to our selves Fitter occasion will hereafter offer it self only I say as Augustine Augustin tract in Ioh. 3. seeing God gives freely let us love freely quia gratis dedit gratis ama noli ad praemium diligere deum The Second point followes That it may be of grace it must be of faith This way of justification and no other preserves the glory of Gods grace entire Let us see how say some because grace is promised and given only to the believer Paraeus ad loc that is a truth But the Apostles purpose in this argument is not to shew the necessity of faith to the obtaining of grace but rather to the maintaining of the glory of Gods grace in the matter of our righteousness and salvation Let us enquire therefore how this means of justification by faith stablisheth grace and how that other by works either overthrows or empairs it May we say as some of late because faith is a free gift of God in us The like may be said of charity But take faith correlatively thou shalt see easily how this means of justification alone and no other makes grace glorious For if all our title to righteousness and salvation accrew to us only for the obedience sake of Christ apprehended by faith who sees not how entirely the glory of all belongs to the grace of God But I wonder how Papists with all their skill can uphold the concurrence of works in procuring our title to righteousness and salvation and not overthrow or clip at the least the glory of Gods grace Perhaps because our works proceed of grace but Dic sodes are they meerly of grace or partly of the power of nature Their common consent is that though grace be a principall yet naturall abilities have their partnership in every good work So much as they ascribe to nature so much they derogate from the grace of God See Annotat. ad cap. 3. vers 27. S. Bern Ser. 67. in Cantic 28. Deest gratiae quicquid meritis deputas as S. Bernard The Second argument followes That the promise may be sure and that to all the seed Whether we make this a second argument or a confirmation of the minor in the former is not much materiall If a new argument thus is the frame If the promise must be sure then must the inheritance be of faith But the promise must be sure Ergo. Take it the other way It is of grace Why Because else the promise cannot be sure I rather conceive it as a second argument though linked thus artificially with the former In it we have also two points First That the promise is sure Secondly That except the inheritance be of faith the promise cannot be sure Sure Whether in it self in respect of certain accomplishment or to us in respect of our apprehension and undoubtfull perswasion This later some insist on and thus give the sense If the inheritance depend on any thing except faith and grace we can never have any assurance to obtain the promise but must needs be filled with uncomfortable doubtings and uncertain waverings And that is a truth but not here directly taught The Apostle speaking of the certainty of the promise rather in it self then to our apprehension and perswasion though by Consequence this follows from the former Observ The Point is That the promise of inheritance is firm and shall have certain accomplishment Read for this Heb. 8.6 where the Apostle compares the two covenants together and shews that of grace to be preferred especially in respect of the certainty of it and of our attainment of the blessings therein conveyed And view 1. The Mediatour Christ in whose bloud it is ratified Heb. 10.2 The removall of impediments by mercifull pardon of sinnes and imperfections Heb. 8.3 The certain donation of graces necessary to attainment and our confirmation therein ibidem the certainty of accomplishment is easily discerned The more solid is our Hope and the more firm should be our faith and confidence as the Apostle inferres Heb. 10.23 So that neither violence of afflictions nor prevailing of heresies nor conscience of our own weaknesses and imperfections to which pardon is promised Heb. 8. nor any doubt of perseverance in state of grace should make us waver 2 Tim. 2.19 For he is faithfull that hath promised not onely salvation but pardon of sinnes donation of spirit perseverance and perfecting the work of grace to the day of the Lord Jesus Christ It is true there are duties required of us to the obtaining of the promises as faith and perseverance in faith obedience and perseverance in obedience but that God that requires them hath covenanted to work them Jer. 31. and 32.40 The next point is The necessity of faith and the property it hath peculiar to it self in making firm after a sort the promise the truth of this point will the better appear if we shall consider a little the consent and difference of the two Covenants Their agreement is this in both is promised Salvation and Blessedness of the Law it is said That if a man do it he shall live thereby as of faith he that believeth shall be saved Their difference stands 1. In the condition the Law requiring perfect obedience to be performed in our own persons threatning a curse to every transgression Gal. 3.10 The other Covenant requiring faith of the Messiah and sincere endeavour of obedience A second difference the Law requires perfect obedience promiseth neither ability to perform it nor pardon to any imperfection The Gospel so requires faith that it promiseth to work it so new obedience that withall the Lord covenanteth to make us walk in his statutes Ezek. 36. Yea and to pard on imperfections Jer. 31. Heb. 8. And besides delivers all these promises as ratified unto us in the bloud of Christ These things thus briefly laid together shew how faith onely makes the promise sure because to the believer promise is made 1. To remove impediments by pardon and sanctification 2. To enable to do and to persevere in doing whatsoever the Lord in the Covenant of grace requires to salvation Who can shew like promises made to the Worker that not without cause said the Apostle It must be of faith that the promise may be sure it being impossible by the Law to obtain the promises The third Argument from the extent of the promise both in the making and accomplishment It is made and must be sure to all the seed not onely to that of the Law but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham therefore it must be of faith and not of the Law The minor hath its proof in the latter end of the verse and is also further confirmed and illustrated vers 17. Abraham is the father of all
was fully assured 2. The matter subject of his perswasion or the Proposition to which Abraham thus fully assented That what God had promised he was able to perform where we may also conceive to be implyed the grounds of Abrahams so firm believing The promise and power of God Observ From the First we observe That faith in her strength Beza Paraeus ad loc Calvin Instit and perfection hath firmness yea fulness of assurance others otherwise conceive the note and thus collect That fulness of perswasion is of the nature and essence of Faith That none of Gods children erre to their discomfort thinking they have no truth of believing because they want fulness of perswasion thus much understand That in exact defining the custome is to consider virtues c. Abstractly from their subjects 2. In such abstraction to express their nature in terms importing their greatest excellency and perfection 3. Virtues morall and Theologicall they describe not as they are in our practice but as they ought to be by Gods prescript What now if faith in us be doubtfull yet in it self and according to its own nature it is a full perswasion What though in the disposition and beginnings it be wavering yet in the excellency and perfection it is of infallible certainty What if our practice of faith be weak yet God requires perfection of it and our striving must be to perfection prescribed Vse Thus let us use it As an occasion to humble our selves for our doubtings Augustin Epist 29. ad Hieron for that which Augustine saith of charity is as true of faith profectò illud quod minus est quà m debt ex vitio est yet thus much withall Let us not so far deject our selves as to think we have no truth of faith because we want perfection and fulness of assurance yet may faith be in truth where that measure is not attained See Annot. ad vers 20. as the truth of humane nature in an infant wanting the strength of grown men The matter of Abrahams perswasion followeth That what he had promised he was able also to perform The points observable are 1. That faith even justifying is an assent rather then affiance having for his object terminum complexum whereof see Annot. ad vers 3. 2. Take notice of two speciall grounds for faith to rest on the promise and power of God both joyntly considered establish faith sever either from other thou makest faith either phantasticall or wavering Hereof see Annot. ad ver 17. VERS 22. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness THe fruit of Abrahams faith is here expressed that is his justification The depravations of this Scripture by Adversaries are many Let us briefly take view of them The first is from the illation Therefore it was imputed c. Hence they collect that faith avails to justification virtuously and by way of merit Man is justified by faith not because it apprehends the promise but because it obteins remission of sinns suo quodam modo etiam mereatur how infer they the conclusion out of this Scripture The Apostle in this place saith Bellarmine Bellar. de just lib. 1. cap. 17. sets down the cause why Abrahams faith was reputed justice to wit because by believing he gave glory to God therefore for the merit of that faith he justified Abraham Where first let us weigh how they utterly crosse the intention of the Apostle in his whole discourse which is to exclude all merits of men from justification can we imagine he excludes the merit of other works to substitute the merit of faith 2. Besides that it is easily observable that the Apostle maintains a continuall opposition betwixt faith and merit as ver 4. To their argument thus we answer That the Apostles illation indeed implyes a sequel of justification upon the performance of faith yet none such as is caused by the merit and excellency of the gifs or work of faith above other works and this is that deceives them that they can conceive no connexion betwixt our offices and Gods benefits but what the worth and merit of our performances causeth Know we therefore 1. That there is an infallible connexion betwixt faith and justification so that every one believing is without faith justified But 2. If the reason of this connexion be demanded it is apparently Gods covenant and promise therefore shall every believer receive remission of sins because so runs the promise in the covenant of grace Believe and thy sins shall be forgiven August de verb. Apost Serm. 16. Augustines speech for the generall let be remembred Debitor factus est Deus non aliquid à nobis accipiendo sed quod ei placuit promittendo Abraham believed and was therefore justified the cause if we seek is the promise of God not the worth of his faith which 1. Is a duty 2. Gods gift 3. In us imperfect And if Abrahams faith were the meritorious cause of his justification I demand whether as faith or as such faith that is whether in respect that he believed or in respect that he believed in this full measure was he justified If in respect of his measure then methinks it will follow that only such measure of faith sufficeth to justification so the disciples of Christ so doubtfull and wavering in many main articles till after Christs ascension must be reputed for that time unjustified if faith simply in what measure soever then can it not be meritorious sith in the beginnings it is so ful of imperfection Thus I conclude Faith is an antecedent no cause properly of justification justification a consequent of believing no effect issuing out of the virtue and merit of faith Trelcat Instit de justific the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore notes not the cause of the consequent but of the sequel or consequence saith a learned Divine Their second collection is this Rhemens ad loc That faith justifying is a generall faith whereby we assent to the truth of Gods speeches in generall Bellarm. de justif lib. 1. cap. 11. and no such speciall faith or affiance as Protestants require to justification Their reason The faith whereby Abraham was justified was no other then this A general perswasion of Gods faithfulness and power at large Ergò Answ The question hath been largely handled ad vers 3. whither I refer the Reader To their argument thus I answer their antecedent is untrue Abrahams faith was not of Gods truth and power in generall onely but of both applyed to the particular promised From these generals he concluded the particular touching the seed in whom all nations should be blessed In his believing and the matter of it we must conceive something propounded and considered as a conclusion somthing as an argument or premisses inferring the conclusion to both which Abraham assented To the conclusion by virtue of the premisses The conclusion was particular I shall have a seed in whom all
finde faith to have any such act or office as to apprehend and receive Christ and his righteousness Answ Amongst other places that is pregnant Rom. 5.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est oblatam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fidei videlicet manu Beza Where believers are deseribed to be such as receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness that receive to wit by faith as by a hand the gift of righteousness that is the righteousnes of Christ given unto us After this sentence we see how faith alone justifieth namely because faith only hath fitness to receive the gift of righteousness This laid also for a ground boasting is excluded in every respect which after all other explanations is left in some respect unto men Thus also is the comfort of conscience left provided for when Gods children shall be taught out of the word of God that the righteousness whereby they are justified before God is so absolute and every way perfect as is that of Christ and that it sufficeth them to justification that they receive it whether by strong or weak Faith the virtue of Righteousness being stil the same when it is received in what measure soever it be received As the alms given is of the same benefit whether the hand that receives it be steady or shaking so it be received The summe of all is this sith Faith is accepted to Justification neither in respect of the Worth of it to procure it nor yet as being the Form of righteousness nor as a Preparation nor as a Condition It remains that it justifieth Instrumentally onely or because it apprehends that for which we are justified namely the merit and Righteousness of Christ For Use of this point let it be this It affords Comfort to every weary soul groaning under the burthen of sinne and pressed with the Terrours of the Almighty and affrighted with the Curse of the Law due to Transgressions If thou believe in the Lord Jesus and hast received this grace by faith to receive his righteousness offered in the Gospel thy sins are forgiven and shall never be imputed to Condemnation Thou standest as just in Gods sight as if thou hadst in thine own person performed exactly the whole obedience that the Law requires And let no man say it is true if they could firmly believe as Abraham but their faith is so weak and wavering that even for it Condemnation is due them Answ For this Consider that it is not the strength of Faith that justifies not Faith as an Act wherein our Righteousness stands but it is that which Faith apprehends that justifies even the obedience and righteousness of Christ That apprehended truly in what measure soever covers all defects not onely of Legall obedience but even of Faith it self A second thing here observable is this That whereas to Abraham that had now long time been Regenerate and in state of grace had done many works of Piety and obedience Yet Faith is still counted to Righteousness it follows well that whole justification is absolved in Faith and that Faith is not onely the beginning of Righteousness but the very complement thereof And Bellarm. qua supra it is to be observed against that errour of Romanists that to evade the direct testimonies of Scripture against Justification by works and for that by Faith alone have devised a distinction of Justification It is say they Concil Trident Sess 6. of two sorts The First whereby a man of unjust is made just and that stands in two things 1. Remission of sins 2. Infusion of gracious habits whereby the heart of man is disposed and inclined to actuall justice The Second is that whereby a man of Righteous becomes more righteous encreasing the habits infused by exercise of them in doing good works The First of these is ascribed to Faith The Second to good works Now To omit that in this Doctrine they confound things to be distinguished namely Justification and Sanctification There is no ground for this distinction of justification in Scriptures nay grounds many against it For 1. If good works have this force to make us more justified in the sight of God how comes it to pass that Abrahams Iustification is still ascribed to faith For that the place Gen. 15.6 is to be understood de secunda justificatione Sasbout confesseth Sasbout ad locum Besides this the Apostle Phil. 3.9 apertly declares his whole justification both in his first Conversion Kemnit in Exam. in that time wherein he wrote yea at the day of Resurrection to be wholly and meerly absolved in Faith And surely if there were such virtue in the exercise of Good works as to make us more justified in the sight of God Saint Paul did fondly count so basely of them as to call them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dung and loss Add hereunto that the Apostle 1 Cor. 4.4 speaking of the righteousness wherein he lived after his Conversion yet plainly disclaims opinion of justification thereby he was privy to himself of no insincerity in his calling having since his calling lived in all good conscience yet saith he I am not hereby justified What shall we say he speaks of his first justification as if it could possibly be thought that the works not yet extant could be the means of that justification which he had before he had works More I adde not We will now proceed to that which followeth VERS 4. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt The applying of these verses to the Apostles purpose see in the Analysis Sense To him that worketh That is say some that presumes of his works others that deservs by his works Thus rather To him that hath or brings works to God The wages or reward What is the wages here mentioned Paraeus Some take the Apostle to reason out of a principle in Civil life by similtude applyed to this purpose but the Antithesis bears it not Wages here understand Synecdechicè put for estimation of righteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is say some is not imputed but the Catachresis is too hard and abhorrent from all custome of speech Cajetan Is notreckoned that is not paid saith Cajetan What if we say the speech is borrowed from the custome of Common life on this manner That the Lord should be imagined after the manner of men to keep his book of accounts wherein the records both the behaviours of men and the wages due unto them according to the same It s not much unlike that we fiud Mal. 3.16 Let us for the purpose imagine the Lord the great distributor of reward according to the double covenant of works and grace to have referred all men to two ranks viz. Workers and Believers to resolve with himself to crown both with a sentence of righteousness according as they bring to him either works such as the Law prescribes or
against unbelieving ungodly ones is yet so exceeding ready to forgive even the ungodly believing in him so that we may say as David every one to his own soul faith once received Psal 43.5 Why art thou so cast down O my soul and why art thou so disquieted within me Trust in God and thou shalt find him full of mercy and compassion exceeding ready to forgive the sins that he hath enabled thee to repent Hast thou sinned in seculo saith Bernard Bernard in die Pet. Pauli Serm. 30. Not more then Paul In religion and state of grace Not more then Peter and yet they obtained mercy and as Paul speaks It is for ever a * 2. Tim. 1.16 Beza Piscator pattern of Gods pardoning mercy to all such as shall hereafter believe in him to everlasting life Neither impieties in seculo nor infirmities in grace are imputed to such as believe in him for behold he justifies the ungodly believing in him that though all sins be damnable in their own nature yet may it be said in a sense The onely damning sin is infidelity insomuch as if infidelity were not no sin should be imputed to condemnation But thus far of the first argument against justification by Works drawn from the example of Abraham The rest of this Verse hath been already explained ad vers 3. VERS 6 7 8. 6. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works 7. Saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered 8. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sinne TO the example of Abraham taken from Moses is adjoyned the testimony of David amongst the Prophets And Theodorets reason of the choice is not to be contemned for Abraham lived before the Law and now he shews that David who lived under the Law gave Testimony to Faith The rendring differs Beza Piscator David describeth the blessedness of that man others had rather thus David saith Blessedness to be that mans unto whom c. In the issue is no great odds The summe of the argument is this If David say That blessednesse is that mans to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without works Then is no man justified by works But David saith Blessedness is that mans to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without works Ergò No man is justified by works The minor hath its proof ver 6 7 8. borrowed from Psalme 32. But may some say How follows the Proposition that if a man be blessed that hath righteousness without works imputed to him then no man is justified by works Answ Thus as I conceive prescribing to no man If blessedness be onely that mans that hath righteousness without works imputed then justification cannot be by works Inasmuch as blessedness is his onely that is justified justification being a part of blessedness If any Justiciary shall object That the exclusive particle onely is not extant in the Apostle and that though he be blessed that hath righteousness imputed without works yet may he be blessed also that hath righteousness purchased by works Let this suffice him for answer That there is one onely way of all mens justification for else how follows Pauls argument Abraham was not justified by Works but by Faith Ergò No other man After this conceit a man might mannerly deny the Apostles consequence and tell him that though Abraham were justified by Faith yet another man may be iustified by Works Now to make way to the particulars observable in this sixth verse It may be said that the words are no where extant in David and how then saith the Apostle that David saith The man is blessed to whom righteousness without works is imputed David indeed saith that he is blessed that hath not his sins imputed no where that righteousness without works is imputed Answ Though the words be no where extant in David yet the sense is and though he speak not in expresse words yet he speaks it in effect inasmuch as by iust and necessary consequence it may be deduced for he that saith A man is blessed that hath not his sins imputed saith in effect that he is blessed that hath righteousness without works imputed Observ Whence observe we that Gods Spirit in Scripture speaks as well what he implyeth as what he expresseth as well what by consequence is deduced as what in summe of words he uttereth Instances are frequent Iam. 4.5 Saith the Scripture in vain the spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth it after envy Now where finde we those words in all the Scripture By deduction we have them Num. 11.29 in express terms we no where finde them yet saith Iames the Scripture saith so Luk. 1.73 74. God sware to Abraham that we should be delivered out of the hands of our enemies that we might serve him without fear where finde we such an oath extant for words In no Scripture yet when God sware he would bless him Gen. 22.18 and that in his seed all nations should be blessed He sware in effect we should be delivered from our enemies and serve him without fear inasmuch as this blessedness stands in being delivered from our enemies and it s no small part thereof to serve God in holiness The Observation is of speciall use for maintaining the fulness of the Scripture and for helping us in sundry controversies Say Papists and Anabaptists where have we it taught that infants should be baptized in all the Scripture Answ Not in express terms but by just consequence we have it From the generall Mat. 28.19 From pâ—rity Gen. 17.12 From principles Act. 2.39 Where finde we that Christs Righteousness is imputed to us for justification saith Bellarmine Answ Bellarm. de justific l. 2. and lib. 1 cap. 16. In express terms we finde it not but virtually and by just consequence we have it 2 Cor. 5.21 In the equivalent we have it Rom. 5.17 18 19. The adversaries saith Bellarmine are wont to boast much of the express word of God and to reduce all their opinions to this one head But in the case of justification by faith only that help fails them For they were never yet able to shew in the Scripture that particle only where they intreate of justifiing faith Answ But we are taught that if we have it by consequence from the Scripture we have it in the Scripture The Scripture propounding but two means only of justification Faith and Works and denying all justifying vertue to works affords it us not the conclusion by consequence We are justified by faith only see Rom. 3.18 Again have we it not in the equivalent Gal. 2.16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the faith of Iesus Christ as much as if he had said by faith only In a word where we have the generall we have the particulars where principles and causes the effects where one equall there also the other By
the like reason where a phrase or thing equivalent the phrase and thing to which it is equivalent c. And whatsoever may otherwise by just and necessary consequence be deduced from the Scripture that is all the sentence and contents of Scripture They say as well what they imply as what they express quae colliguntur ex Scripturis sacris perindè habenda sunt ac si in illis scripta essent Gregor Nazianzen lib. 5. Theolog. See Ruizius Reg. 74. and see to this purpose likewise Tertullian in his Treaty despectaculis The particulars of the sentence come now to be scanned David saith Blessedness is that mans to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without works Wherein observe we two things First The subject or Person to whom David appropriates blessedness The man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness Secondly His description Observ Whereout amounts this conclusion That the man iustified is the only blessed man on earth The branches are two First he is blessed Secondly Only blessed Needs either of them proof His sins are remitted vers 8. His curse removed Gal. 3.13 His conscience pacified Rom. 5.1 His person accepted Heb. 11. His heart sanctified Act. 5. His actions pleasing God Heb. 11.6 His crosses sanctified His hopes certain Rom. 5.5 Death he fears not Heb. 2. Persecutions he laughs at Rom. 5. Satan he triumphs over hell is quenched God reconciled judgment with joy expected Angels serve him Devils envy him Heaven is prepared for him Give me now he that can this mans peere for blessedness amongst all the Monarchs of the world Oh miserable blessedness that men fancy to themselves without justification One swims in sensuall pleasures and thinks himself blessed that he hath wherewith to glut his sensuall appetite saith Tully a speech better beseeming beasts then men another hath his castle of wealth and no misfortune he thinks can approach him but wretched man what profits it to win the whole world and lose thine own soul what ransome wilt thou give for the sins of thy soul A third feeds upon the breath of the people and thinks himself a God because the people so applaud him but miserable man that thou art the basest vermin can consume thee The last more generous place their felicity in the action of vertue but wilt thou hear who said without faith it s not possible to please God and the most glorious actions of a man not justified are but glittering sins In a word goe over all the blessedness that the world fancyeth to it self out of Christ Thou shalt be forced to say of every particular This also is vanity and vexation of spirit was ever any man more happily miserable in this kinde then he in the top of the golden empire yet see him in the middest of his pompe and glory shaken with the fingers writing on the wall Dan. 5. Such and more miserable is the state of all those again whom the handwriting of ordinances stands still in force unreconciled to them in the cross of Christ Be awakened therefore all ye that are drunken with the vanities of the world Why lay ye out silver and gold for things that cannot profit yea that cannot but hurt whiles they feed corruption and aggravate condemnation labour for righteousness remission of sins for justification for to every one unjustified I may say as Christ woe be unto him it had been better for him that he had never been born or born a dog or a toad or if there be any other creature more loathsome or detestable in the eyes of man The wrath of God saith our Saviour abideth on him John 3.3.6 Gods curse even all the curses written in the book of the Law he lyeth open unto no peace hath he in his life Isa 57.20 in death horrour or astonishment after death damnation never to be ended And let Gods children partakers of his high favour herewith comfort themselves in all those outward afflictions that press them The were but Godless Epicures that placed felicity in vacuity of grief and that could discern no other happiness of a man but when sensuall pleasures afforded him If we believe the Authour of happiness there is more blessedness even in Christian sorrow then in all such heathenish pleasures Heb. 12.6 yea afflictions are so farre from impairing the happy state of a justified man that they rather confirm and encrease it while they kill the corruption that is in them and so assure them that the sinnes are remitted which are thus mortified And shall any Christian now think he is therefore miserable whiles he feels smart of sorrows when he knows his sins are remitted The heathen could say that vice onely made miserable and that a wise man lost not his happiness no not in equuleo Christianity much more teacheth the sinner whose sins stand still in force against him to be onely wretched and the justified man in the greatest outward afflictions to be blessed therefore because justified And I would but know of such weaklings that think themselves miserable because afflicted Whether they think the happier the glutton with his Belly-chear or the Lazar pinched with hunger David every day afflicted or those gallants that spend their dayes in mirth and in a moment go down to hell Augustine would soon resolve Hîc ure hîc seca saith he ut in aeternum parcas For me thus I resolve Let me have my sins pardoned my person accepted with God for outward pressures I say as David lo here I am Let the Lord do with me what seemeth good in his eyes 2 Sam. 15.26 See we now the description of the man thus Blessed He is such an one as to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without works In the words three things 1. He hath righteousness 2. The quality of his righteousness without works 3. The manner how he is partaker of it by Imputation For the first that in justification we are made partakers of righteousness vers 11. Circumcision was to Abraham a seal of the righteousness of faith which he had being uncircumcised Paul desires to be found in Christ having the righteousness which is by faith of Christ Phil. 3.9 and perhaps it is true that Bellarmine hath that justification hath the name à termino ad quem because that thereby we are made partakers of righteousness 2 Cor. 5.21 We are said to be made The righteousness of God in Christ and Rom 5. To be made righteous This then let stand for a ground That in justification Righteousness is imparted to us But secondly it is enquired What righteousness this is of Righteousness in this question of justification we find two kinds One called our own righteousness or the righteousness which is by the Law The other the righteousness of God sometimes called the righteousness of faith or the righteousness which is by the faith of Jesus See Rom. 10.3 Phil. 3.9 our own Righteousness or the righteousness of the Law is the perfect obedience of the Law performed
by ourselves The righteousness of God is the righteousness which God in Christ performed fulfilling the Law for us called the Righteousness of Faith because we are by faith made partakers of it See Illyric Zanch. ad Phil. 3. If any shall demand what the difference between these two is I answer They differ not at all in the matter or substance of righteousness for the righteousness which by Christ we are made partakers of is that very righteousness which the Law prescribes namely perfect obedience to the Law but they differ efficiente our righteousness that we in our persons perform to the law And that it is no other righteousness then what the law prescribes for substance whereof in justification we are made partakers that one place Rom. 9.32 is clear where the Apostle giving a reason why the Jews that followed the law of righteousness attained not the law of righteousness that is as most interpret the righteousness which the law prescribes The reason was because they sought it not by faith but by the works of the law as if he had said Had they sought it by believing as they did by working they had attained the righteousness which the law prescribes to justification The righteousness of the law then we obtain by faith to justification It is therefore the righteousness which in justification we are made partakers of How then is it said to be righteousness without works I answer In respect of us without works In respect of Christ the performer not so Come we now to the means how it is imputed unto us and that is by Imputation Imputation Imputation of righteousness What it is in this case we may thus describe To be an act of God ascribing to us the righteousness of Christ and counting it ours no less then if we had in our own persons performed it Touching it it is enquired whether there be any such act of God in our justification Papists generally deny it and make the righteousness of Christ to avail to justification onely as a cause procuring to us remission of sins and the gifts of the holy Ghost That which our Divines hitherto have consented in is this That the righteousness of Christ is not onely the cause for which the Lord remits sins c. but the very thing whereby we are made righteous in the sight of God Their reasons are these 1. Because we are said to be made righteous by the obedience of Christ Rom. 5.19 shall we say as by a procuring cause nay rather formally For so are we made sinners by the transgression of Adam And the purpose of the Apostle in that comparison betwixt Adam and Christ seems to be this To shew that it is no absurd thing that we should be made righteous by the righteousness of Christ seeing we were made sinners by Adams disobedience Inst But Adams disobedience was not ours by imputation but we rather were actours therein by an implicite act sinning in Adam To say nothing that the whole stream of Interpreters judge otherwise Let it be granted that we were actours in Adams sinne being in his loins Why not also actours in Christs obedience being one mystically with him by bond of the spirit 2. It is no more absurd that we should be righteous by imputation of Christs Righteousness then that Christ should be a sinner by imputation of our sins but Christ was a sinner by imputation of our sins Inst Not a sinner but a sacrifice for sinne Answ The exposition is ancient but 1. The Antithesis bears it not and 2. How could God punish him in that extremity had he not taken upon him our sins 3. For to Papists methinks of all men Imputation should be no such ridiculous matter sith they are of opinion the overplus of some Saints righteousness may be applyed to others by indulgence to make up the defects of their obedience How I wonder except by imputation 4. Quid quod Their Bellarmine plainly confesseth Bellarm. de Amiss grat stat peccat lib. 4. c. 10. Bernard ser 1. de Dom. 1. post octavas Epiphaniae that Adams sin is imputed to all his posteritie so as if they had all committed the same and alledgeth to this purpose the testimonies of Augustine and Bernard Nostra est inquit Bernardus Adami culpa quia etsi in alio nos tamen peccavimus nobis justo Dei judicio imputabatur licèt occulto And why so absurd sith Adams sin is in this manner ours Christs righteousness should also in like sort become Ours that as the same Bernard speaks aliena lavet aqua quos culpa inquinaverat aliena And so wash as the other had defiled Against it these reasons are brought First that it hath no testimonie either in Scriptures or Fathers to avow it Answ What none neither expressed nor implyed we have above shewed that the Scripture testifieth as well what it implyeth as what it expresseth how say we now to this Scripture in hand God imputeth righteousness without works whose our own that stands in works Phil. 3.9 Anothers therefore and whose else I wonder except Christs who alone is mentioned to be the procurer of our righteousness Hear S. Bernard Domine Bern. ser in Cant. 61. memorabor justitiae tuae solius Ipsa est enim mea nempe factus es mihi Tujustitia à Deo nunquid mihi verendum ne non una ambobus sufficiat non est pallium breve quod secundum Prophetam non possit operire duos Justitia tua justitia in aeternum quid longius aeternitate te pariter me operiet largiter larga aeterna justitia Object 2. No necessitie of such imputation of Christs righteousness Answ Yes That we may be found at that great day having such perfection of righteousness as for which we may be accepted and pronounced righteous See Phil. 3.9 Inst But our inherent righteousness is perfect for faith hope charity c. are perfect Answ Hear Bernard Are we better then our Fathers They said with as much truth as humility All our righteousnesses are like the clothes of a menstruous woman Isa 64.6 and again Quomodo pura justitia ubi non potest culpa deesse Augustine August epist 29. ad Hieron Charitas in aliis major in aliis minor in aliis nulla plenissima verò quae jam non potest augeri quamdiu hic homo vivit in nemine est quamdiu autem augeri potest profecto illud quod minus est quà m debet Bern. in Cant. ser 174. ex vitio est And again Charitatis effectualis initium quidem profectúmque vitam quoque praesentem experiri divinâ posse gratiâ non negamus sed plane consummationem defendimus futurae felicitati And if any shall ask why it is commanded when it cannot be fulfilled Bernard answers Judicavit utilius ex hoc ipso suae illos insufficiontiae admoneri ut scirent sane ad quem justitiae finem
the guilt and punishment thereof c. is onely removed the thing it self remaining still in us Manet pccatum sed jam non dominatur c. Bern. in Psal Qui habitat Serm. 10. evulsum quodammodo nondum tamen expulsum dejectum sed non prorsus ejectum saith Bernard of men regenerate A second question here usually discussed is Whether whole justification stands in remission of sins I shall not need to shew how fitly this place affords the question it is shewn plentifully by others In this question my purpose is not to deal at all against Papists but to handle it as it is now controverted among our own Divines The answer thereto by those that think iustification in this question to signifie nothing but acquitall and discharge from sin must needs be this That it stands onely in remission of sinns for what is it to acquit from sin but to remit sins And this seems strange to me that men urging that signification of the word to be proper to this question can seek for any other thing to make up the entirety of Justification Is it nothing to be justified but to be acquit from sin then sure to be justified implies no more but to have sins remitted Either therefore we must grant that to justifie in this question signifies somewhat more or else that whole justification stands in remission of sins And let that be the first argument Justification in Scripture signifies onely a quittal Ergò To this answer must be made if any be to purpose that to iustifie hath some other signification so some labour to shew That it signifies sometimes to make just as Rom. 4.5 sometimes to account or pronounce just or to give testimony of righteousness Luke 7.29 sometimes to give reward of righteousness 1. Kings 8.32 c. Whether these satisfie or no I had rather others judge then I determine Their second reason is from this place but diversly collected some thus David gives no where a full description of justification Ergò Whole justification is absolved in remission of sins Answ It cannot be shewed that either David or Paul intended here to describe much lesse perfectly to define justification For what though the Apostle doth purposely dispute of the means of justificatior must he needs therefore alledge this testimony of David to expresse the nature of it He proves by this testimony that justification is not by works because the justified man hath sins forgiven in his justification and so the argument follows well though justification be not here perfectly defined see suprà in Exposition nay consider that by this means his argument is as nothing for if remission of sins be whole justification will it follow thence that we are justified without works Excipiat quispiam Let justification stand in remission of sins that may yet be procured by works Others thus gather it To pronounce Blessed to impute righteousness to remit sins are all one with the Apostle Ergò Justification stands onely in remission of sins Answ The Antecedent is untrue Their third argument is that testimony Acts 13.39 and 2. Cor. 5.21 Paul in the first place tells us That by remission of sins he means justification from those things by which by Moses Law we could not be justified c. And in the other he shews we are reconciled by not having sins imputed Answ To the first the adverse part would answer that there is shewed Justification stands in remission of sins ex parte that being our part of justification but an other part there is and that is making us righteous with the righteousness of the Law which we have by imputation from Christ To the second the answer would be made that our reconciliation stands partly in not imputing sinne and it is usuall to declare the whole by some part as whole redemption by remission of sins Eph. 1. yet may we not say that redemption stands onely in remission of sinns Their chief reason is this for that justification is ascribed onely to the bloud of Christ now that bloud of Christ procured us nothing but remission of sins Answ It is answered that the bloud of Christ is there put synecdochicè for the whole obedience of Christ The other opinion is this That justification hath two parts 1. Our discharge from our sinns 2. Our furnishing with the righteousness of the Law Their reasons are these First for that we are said to be made righteous by the actuall obedience of Christ Rom. 5.19 as well as in other places to have remission of sins by his bloud Ob. By obedience may be understood his obedience in suffering 2. That the Law since the fall requires to justification not onely satisfaction for breaches by punishment but also that the obedience therein prescribed be performed else still the curse lies on us Answ It is answered 1. That we are not under the Law but under grace 2. That by remission of sins we have the righteousness of the Law for all sins as well of omission as of commission are cleared in the bloud of Christ 3. Because God in his word hath prescribed no other way to life but perfect obedience to the Law It is answered that in the Gospel another way is prescribed Believe and thou shalt be saved Acts 16. Mar. 16.4 Dan. 9.24 The Messiah is promised not onely to expiate sin but also to bring everlasting righteousness Answ What if that may be understood of that we perform in the studie of Sanctification Well whatever become of that controversie this conclusion we have evidently hence That in Justification we have perfect remission of sin See Acts 13.39 Papists themselves herein consent with us as we have seen before And will it not hence follow that therefore we are delivered from the whole guilt and punishment of our sins Here now they-begin to mince it for stablishing their doctrine of satisfaction to be made to Gods justice Sasbout ad loc Bellarm. ad Psal 31. and our release is they say onely from guilt of eternall punishment The question hath been largely discuffed ad cap. 3. Here onely I would have them reconcile their two opinions First that when sins are remitted they are utterly extinct and abolished so that there is nothing left that can be reputed sinne Secondly that there remains unto him that hath his sins thus remitted part of the guilt to be expiated by his own satisfaction Hear a subtile shift Remission of sins is either totall or partiall Totall when it is remitted quoad omnem poenam Partiall when it is remitted onely quoad culpam poenam aeternam Now where the remission is totall there is no reservation of any punishment where partiall onely in respect of eternal punishment there remaineth still reatus poenae temporalis Contra. But I demand whereon is that guilt founded Me thinks it must needs be on something that hath veram propriam rationem peccati Bellarm. de Justific l. 2. c. 7. ad Psal
31. but according to their opinion Remission so takes our sins ut nè vestigium quidem ullum maneat it dispels them as the sun doth clouds so that nothing of them remains washeth them away so as we become whiter then snow Well yet as clean as we are made from fault and sin yet some of the guilt may lie on our persons and the just God may inflict upon his innocent and purest servants punishments temporall yea the same for smart which the devils and damned in hel endure Out upon Popery it is Bilinguis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And of this second argument against Justification by Work thus far VERS 9 10 11 12. 9. Cometh this blessedness then upon the Circumcision onely or upon the uncircumcision also for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness 10. How was it then reckoned When he was in circumcision or in uncircumcision not in circumcision but in uncircumcision 11. And he received the signe of Circumcision a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised that he might be the father of all them that believe though they be not circumcised that righteousness might be imputed to them also 12. And the father of Circumcision to them who are not of the Circumcision onely but also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham which he had being yet uncircumcised THe scope and dependence of this passage is diversly conceived Some think the Apostle here propounds a new argument for justification by Faith against justification by Works and these also diversly collect it Some thus Abraham was justified before he was circumcised Ergò He was not justified by circumcision nor by consequent by any works of the Law The ground of which argument is this because if circumcision were cause of his justification then must he needs have been circumcised before he was justified for the effect cannot be without or before the cause Others thus Paraeus ad loc If Abraham were justified by faith then must all men whether circumcised or uncircumcised be so justified But Abraham was justified by faith Ergo. The consequence of the proposition they imagine to have this proof because Abraham is father of both people and they both his sonnes wherefore by good consequent they think it follows that as be was justified so others must be sith there is one reason of the father and children of the pattern and the imitatours of the head of the covenant and of those that in him are admitted into the covenant The scope But methinks weighing the words the scope seems no more but this To shew that the blessing of justification belongs indifferently to Jews and Gentiles believing A point touched before chap. 3. and here again resumed and more purposely proved because he had immediately before made mention of Abrahams justification and their guess is not without ground that think the Apostle now frames answer to that second quaere of Jews Rom. 301. What profit of Circumcision which to this place he hath purposely deferred because from Abrahams case it receives fittest answer Neither let it seem strange that the Apostle should thus digress from his principall conclusion sith we know it is frequent with him in his passage as well to clear doubt as to confirm his purpose And for the scope thus far See Rom. 3. Now the passage to this Conclusion is by way of Prolepsis Came this blessedness then c. Wherein we have 1. The doubt 2. The reason of it 3. The solution The doubt is whether this blessedness that is justification belongs to the circumcision that is to the Jews onely or to the uncircumcision also that is to the Gentiles yet uncircumcised Metonymia adjuncti frequens as Rom. 2.28 the supply of the Verb whether it be falleth as Theophylact or cometh as our English or is as others we have no cause to enquire of the sense being apparently such as we have shewn The reason of the doubt For we say that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousness as if he had said This is in confesso that Abrahams faith was reckoned to him to righteousness Now the question here is Whether sith it is apparent Abraham was circumcised this blessedness of justification or having faith imputed to righteousness belong to circumcision onely or also to the uncircumcised The solution follows carried artificially as this whole passage is in a Rhetoricall Dialogisme How was it then imputed c. as if he had said If this be the doubt see in what state Abraham was when he received this testimony of righteousness and you shall find it was long before he was circumcised For this imputation of faith to righteousness whereof we treat was whiles he yet had no child as appeareth Gen. 15.2 and the ordinance of circumcision began after this towards a fourteen years For after the promise made by God and the testimony of righteousness given to Abraham took he Hagar to wife and of her had Ishmael being 86 years old Gen. 16.16 and many years after was given him in charge the ordinance of circumcision and the execution thereof fell into the year 99 of Abraham and of Ishmael the 13. Gen. 17.24 25 so that by the history it is clear he was justified long before he was circumcised and this as the Apostle seems to intimate wanted not his mysterie the Lord thereby testifying that justification is not had to circumcision but that the uncircumcised believing may also be sharers with Abraham in that blessing Observ Thus far of the Context and sense of the first clause Now the things here observable are these First That very circumstances of Scripture stories afford often substantiall conclusions A weighty conclusion that justification belongs to Gentiles and that which was long controversed in the days of the Apostle See Act. 15. Gal. 5. And it is determined by a circumstance in the story Abraham was justified in time of uncircumcision therefore justification belongs not to the circumcised only A like case we have determined by like evidence Gal. 3.17 out of circumstances of story conferred the blessing must needs be ours by promise and not by the Law How is it proved because the Covenant was made with Abraham in Christ 430 years before the giving of the law in Sinai in Heb. 7.12 13 14. The Apostle proves this conclusion that perfection was not by the leviticall Priesthood What is his arguments because another Priest was to arise according to Davids prophecy not after the order of Aaron even Christ a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek And because it might be said that that other Priest though another yet might be of Aarons order nay saith the Apostle that appears false by this circumstance for our Lord Christ of whom David speaks was of another tribe even of the tribe of Judah unto which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning Priesthood I might be infinite in this kinde but a tast
to the course of the Covenant Now the defect of the verb is diversly supplyed Cajetan some thus adimplenda fuit others thus contingit or contigit and these by the promise understand the thing promised I would rather thus facta est as Gal. 3.16 By the Law That is works or righteousness of the law but of what law that given in Sinai or that of nature Paraeus Answ Vnderstand either or both and that some think is intimated by abscence of the article as a condition or a means we shall anon resolve I have now propounded the severall judgments of Interpreters touching the sence Whether shall we resolve of for my own part I will peremptorily prescribe to no man My judgment only I will propound The conclusion I think is this That justification belongs to believers all and only in respect not of works but of faith The Reasons proving it is taken partly from the form or manner of conveiance in the promise partly from parity In this form If the promise of inheritance to Abraham and his seed was to be accomplished not by legall obedience but by righteousness of faith then it followes that we are justified by faith and not by works But the promise of the inheritance to Abraham was to be accomplished not by the law but by the righteousness of faith Ergo. The consequence of the proposition hath this ground because that justification must be by such means as the inheritance may be obtained and that is obtained so as it is promised it is promised to be obtained by the righteousness of faith as a mean or disposition thereto tending Ergo. Justification is by faith and not by the law Hitherto the Connexion The particulars of this verse are these First The ground of Abrahams and our title to the blessing and that is the promise Secondly The matter of the promise To be the heir of the world Thirdly The means whereby we partake the promise set out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not by the law but by the righteousness of faith Observ Out of the first this is the collection That the title we have to the blessings of God that concerne life and godliness is the promise of God And our whole claim to them is sub titulo promissionis compare Gal 3.18 For this cause I think it is that the blessings of God which we partake are so often called promises and the Children of God the heires of the promise see Heb. 9.12 17. and 10.36 because by virtue of the promise accrewes our claim title and possession of the blessing Hence Peter Act. 2.39 reasons for the blessing and seal thereof in respect of the humbled Iews the promises are made to you and to your seed And to assure us of enjoying them Gods Spirit usually sends us to consideration of the Lords fidelity 1 Cor. 1.9 and 10 13. 1 Thess 5.24 2 Thess 3.3 Heb. 10.23 c. And it is not to be omitted that Budaeus observes that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a promise meerly voluntary and gratuitous without respect to any worth in the party to whom it is made In which respect it seems to be opposed to the law Gal. 3.18 From whence it well follows in Pauls Divinity that it is not founded on the worth of any our works Gal. 3.18 neither may we claim them as due to us for the merit of our obedience And howsoever obedience be required as a qualification of our persons to make us capable thereof yet the cause moving God to bestow them is not our righteousness but Gods promise Memorable is that caveat Moses gives to Israel being now at the skirts of Canaan say not in thy heart c. for my righteousness Deut. 9.4.5 the Lord hath brought me in to possesse this land c. Not for thy righteousness or for the uprightness of thy heart doest thou go in but for the wickedness of these nations c. and that the Lord may porform the word Which the Lord sware unto thy fathers Abraham Isaac and Iacob his reason is vers 16. Thou art a stiff-necked people which self-reason hath place in us all whatever our righteousness be by grace Rebellion alas Rom. 7.23 how much is still in our nature Hence it is that the Saints of God in their prayers to God usually acknowledg their own unworthiness and the blessings they crave and lay claim to they claim by promise read Neh. 1.8 9. And if ever we read in any of them allegation of righteousness as Isai 38.3 It is not intended as cause of the blessing but as a disposition in the person fitting it to receive the blessings made ours by promise In the next place consider we the matter of the promise That he should be the heir of the world The Heir that is saith Mr. Beza out of Vlpian Lord or owner agreeably to that Gal. 4.1 Howbeit something else is withall signified that this possession descends upon him freely as an inheritance not as by way of purchase Of the world That is say some of believers of all nations whereof supra say others of the Kingdome of Heaven others of whole heaven and earth and all the creatures therein with whatsoever heaven or earth can afford to make him blessed in token and pledg whereof Canaan was given him by promise as being the most fertile and pleasant part of the world and withall a type of Heaven and as Heb. 4 and 12. the rest pleasantness and glory thereof This I think the best interpretation for reasons above assigned Observ Whereout observe we That by covenant and promise Gods Children have title to the whole world All things are yours saith the Apostle whether Paul or Cephas or the world c. or things present or things to come all are yours 1 Cor. 3.21 22. And again godliness hath promise of the life that now is and of that which is to come And if any shall say that in experience we see Gods Children none of the greatest sharers in the things of this life Answ The lack of use hinders not our title and property in them The heir is Lord of all in title though in this nonage he differs nothing from a servant Gal. 4.1.2 That little they enjoy they enjoy comfortably as their own without usurpation Tit. 1.15 1 Tim. 4.4 5. 3. A recompence they have in graces equivalent here Mar. 10.29 30. by an happy commutation 4. And in the life to come full fruition of that happiness which passeth all the felicity earth can afford unto them 5. Besides there is in the best something that turns many of these earthly blessings into poyson as Agur intimates Prov. 30.8 9. And experience daily teacheth In that case therefore if the Lord keep us short to prevent our mischief shall we say his promises is not made good 6. Finally our wants in this kinde are usually chastisements of particular disobedience c. From whence followes as a just consectary this
the ground if either they be rejected or Gentiles admitted to be the people of God Certes the name of Abraham considered with the signification pointed at by the Imposer might well have taught them that other nations believing as well as Iews might call Abraham father themselves being though a populous nation yet but one nation whereas Abraham hath promise to be father of many And of the argument thus farre Follows now the illustration of Abrahams Universall Paternitie VERS 17. Before him or as some better render like unto him or after the example of him whom he believed even God who quickneth the dead and calleth those things which be not as though they were THe Fatherhood of Abraham is here illustrated Cajetan Beza Sasbout as some think by the quality or manner of it as I rather with Chrysostome and Theophylact by similitude Those that follow the first sense thus render and interpret Before God that is in the sight of God or in Gods esteem the sense is Not so much by carnall generation which hath place with men as by spiritual cognation wherein faith combines us which God principally respects Chrysostome and Theophylact follow the other interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is ad instar Dei or as the word natively signifies Ex adverso Dei that is after the example of God Exemplar enim ex adverso opponimus saith Sasbout Sense So that the sense is this So far hath God honoured Abrahams faith that in respect thereof he hath made him like himself a father not of this or that nation but universally of all amongst all nations believing after his example The scope of which particle is thus conceived by Theophylact The Iews seemed zealous of Abrahams honour and prerogatives and thought them much impeached if his works were excluded from his justification c. but in the mean time denying his fatherhood to be the reward of believing Theoph. ad loc and respective to faith in his posterity they impaired much that honour that God vouchsafed him in making him like himself a father of many nations which honour he could not preserve if it accrewed from the naturall nexus and tie of bloud and not rather from the propinquity of faith The second point of illustration is the means whereby Abraham became father of nations and that is by believing like him whom he believed take the addition causally and that faith of Abraham is explicated by the ground of it The power of God intimated in that description of God by his powerfull effects annexed Which raiseth the dead c. Observ The points are these First That Abraham by believing or in respect of faith became father of the nations as Theophylact pro praestita fide for the faith which he shewed he received this as a reward to be father of Nations The inferences thence are these First That the Jewes carnall descent from Abraham severed from faith made them not the seed of Abraham I mean that seed to which the promises of Abraham belonged compare Ioh. 8.39 40. and Rom. 9.7 8. c. The second this That Gentiles believing are that seed of Abraham though they descended not out of his loyns Know ye saith the Apostle That they which are of faith the same are the children of Abraham and again They which be of faith are blessed with faithfull Abraham Gal. 3.7 9. That this may the better appear Let us consider the relation wherein Abraham and the Nations stand The Relative is Abraham The Correlative the Nations or his seed What is here the foundation of the relation between them Namely faith that is it that makes Abraham Father of nations that it therefore that makes the nations his children Abraham by believing became Father unto the Nations we therefore by believing become Children of Abraham Where faith hath place there is place for this relation to Abraham where that is wanting the relation ceaseth for that is in this relation the fundamentum So that vainly do unbelieving Jewes lay claim to Abrahams Covenant in respect of the naturall bond of bloud between them and on the other side soundly do Gentiles believing make title to Abrahams Covenant in respect of the propinquity faith hath founded betwixt them Observ The Second point here observable is the ground of Abrahams faith that was the power of God which he considered in the wonderfull effects whereto it extends And let us note it as a piller for faith to rest on the infinite and unresistable power of the promiser It it well observed by Zanchius that in great prudence the pen-men of the Apostles creed prefixed the article of Gods omnipotency as a staff to support our frail faith when ever the strange and supernaturall works of God after mentioned should come into question It is a point of faith that God made all things of nothing consult with nature she hath this principle ex nihilo nihil fit but hold this ground God is omnipotent the article is easily credited It is a point of faith that the body dissolved into the first principles shall live again naturall principles are against it A privatione ad habitum impossibilis est regressus but consider that the promisers power can quicken the dead the point easily admits credence Let us frail creatures when ever we feel faith wavering as touching Gods promise cast our eyes to the transcendent power of the promiser able as * Eph. 3.20 Paul speaks to do exceeding abundantly above all that we can ask or think To particularize a little for help of the simple We have a promise that hell gates that is Satans policy and power Mat. 16.18 shall not prevail against us to overthrow our faith Let a weak man consider his naturall constitution of flesh and blood the small measure of faith given him together with the might of spirituall enemies principalities and powers as Eph. 6.12 How impossible seems perseverance to a man exercised with temptations But if a man would remember the comfort in like case ministred to the Apostle 2 Cor. 12.9 From the power of God perfected in our weakness herein hath the weakest amongst Gods little ones cause of confidence and insulting over the malice of Satan This wisdome learn we in our weakness One Caveat by the way must be remembred That in reasoning from Gods power to any event for the stablishing of faith there must be evidence also of Gods will to perform it It hath been in all ages an usuall sophisme of Heretiques to fly from Scriptures to the power of God for confirmation of their absurdities Praxeas Tertullian advers Prax. in Tertullian maintains this heresie That God the Father is also the Sonne and was incarnate How proves he it Nihil Deo difficile nothing is hard to God and those things that are impossible to men are possible to God Therefore it was not hard for God to make himself the same person both Father and Son To whom
the will of God He means his secret will and yet in so willing Not sinne For Example A child in the mortall disease of his father may desire the life of his father such desire the event proves contrary to the will of God yet is no sinne because Gods will revealed warrants such desire to us Let us see whether we may not find some semblance in the point of Believing In Hezekiah his sickness Isa 38. the Lord sends Isaiah with that message Thou must die An untruth in the event and according to Gods secret purpose yet can we doubt but Hezekiah therein was bound to give credit to the Prophet Similiter To make full the answer Thus let us conceive Look as Gods promises are propound to be believed of particulars so and no otherwise are we bound to believe them how are they propounded Hypothetically rather then Categorically with limitation rather then Absolutely For Example How am I bound my sinnes shall be forgiven To wit Hypothetically If I believe in Christ and repent my sinnes How to believe I shall be saved To wit Hypothetically if I keep precisely the way that leadeth unto life separate the Hypothesis either in mine understanding or practice I am not bound to believe the Remission of my sinnes nay I am bound not to believe it For there is no mandate in the word that tyes an impenitent sinner so continuing to believe that his sinnes are forgiven nay there is something equivalent to a mandate enjoyning in such case to believe the contrary inasmuch as God hath revealed that he will not be mercifull to such an one as goeth on still in his wickedness The summe is this Reprobates are bound to particular faith Hypothetically Absolutely they are not bound shall we say now their binding to such belief binds them to believe an untruth Nothing less For it is true of every particular If he repent His sinnes shall be forgiven him this is ever true and thus onely are the promises propounded to faith of particulars And it is never true that God will pardon any mans sinnes except he repent and believe the Gospel Thus farre by the way in answer to these Arguments rather wittily couched then soundly concluding the purpose Let us now return to the Apostle and from him learn 1. That Confidence in God for righteousness through Christ is necessary to justification 2. That justification belongs to all relying upon God in Christ for righteousness What should I belong it is the testimony of all the Prophets saith Peter given unto Christ that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sinnes Acts 10.41 and it is Christs own assertion that As Whosoever believeth on the sonne of God hath everlasting life So Whosoever believeth not in him shall never see life but the wrath of God abideth on him See John 3.15 16 18.36 Item 1 John 5.13 Where fitly falls in the question Whether any confidence may be placed in our works or gifts of righteousness for justification and salvation For better conceiving the truth in this kind know we that there is a main odds betwixt these two questions 1. Whether our confidence and settled hope of salvation rise from our works and 2. Whether confidence may be placed in our works The one for my part I yield to them in a sense professing my self herein of Lumbards minde Lumbard l. 3. dist 26. Bonavent ad Loc. Magist that our hope ariseth partly from precedent works though the term of merit I abhor Thus conceive it In hope and confidence we must consider 1. The habit 2. The act or exercise of it The habit is meerly of Gods grace infused the act ariseth in part from presence and view of our obedience Bellarm. de justifil 5. c. 7. The places are pregnant 2 Tim. 4. 1 Ioh. 3.3 And Bellarmines reason is not to be condemned the obtaining of falvation depends chiefly on Gods fidelity but in part also on our works of obedience therefore as hope were not certain if we should do good works and God were not faithfull so neither can it be certain if God be faithfull and we neglect good works And from this doctrine our best Divines are not abhorrent all good works which are done in true faith Zanch. in praecept 1. cap. 13 De Spe. avail to confirm faith of the glory that shall be revealed saith Zanchius Non inficiamur c. We deny not but that by the gifts of God bestowed on us our hope of obtaining the good things to come and of having eternall life is confirmed And it is a truth that Thomas hath his term being mollified Spes dicitur ex operibus provenire quantum ad ipsam rem exspectatam For I demand from what evidence conclude we that we shall be saved but from our obedience In all the discourses tending to confirm our assurance whether of faith or hope see if the minor must not be framed out of presence of inherent righteousness For instance How conclude I that Christ is to me Author of salvation The proposition we have in Paul Christ is Author of salvation to all that obey him Heb. 5.9 The minor my conscience must yield me I obey him else can I not rightly conclude that to me Christ is author of salvation Nullus recte sperat beatitudinem nisi qui deo servivit vel proponit deo servire saith Bonaventure truely The difficulty is onely how our hope respects our obedience whether as a cause of salvation or as an evidence and signe onely of our having title to salvation Lumbard qua supra Thus I think we may truly resolve though obedience be a partiall cause of hope as hath now been said yet it is an evidence rather then in property of speech a cause of salvation And in that sense we may yield to Lumbard his description of Hope mitigating one term onely Hope is a certain expectation of future blessedness arising from Gods grace and works precedent and sine operibus bonis aliquid sperare non spes sed praesumptio dici potest Bern. fol. 31. It is infidelis fiducia saith Bernard cùm videlicet in spe peccamus The other question nearly concerns the place Whether confidence for salvation may be placed in our works Here our Adversaries thus mince it Bellarm. de justific lib. 5. cap. 7. The chiefety of our hope and confidence must be placed in God yet in bonis meritis quae verè talia esse compertum sit fiducia aliqua collocari potest modò superbia caveatur and again sithence hope may be placed in our merits if they be true merits sobriè id fiat handsome cautions and limits put to such a conclusion 1. If they be true merits 2. If it be done without pride and with moderation With such impossible and incompatible Hypotheses what conclusion so absurd but may be holden for true Yield we that Adams fall hath not hurt his posterity by depraving